Alternative approaches or strategies may be reasonable depending<

Alternative approaches or strategies may be reasonable depending

on the individual patient’s circumstances, preferences and values. A weak or conditional recommendation usually starts with the standard wording ‘We suggest’. The strength of a recommendation is determined not only by the quality of evidence for defined outcomes but also the balance between desirable and undesirable effects of a treatment or intervention, differences in values and preferences, and where appropriate resource use. Each recommendation concerns a defined target population and is actionable. The quality of evidence is graded from A to D and for the purpose of these guidelines is defined as follows: Grade A evidence means high-quality evidence that comes from consistent AZD9291 mouse results from well- performed randomised controlled trials (RCTs), or overwhelming evidence from another source (such as well-executed observational

studies with consistent strong effects and exclusion of all potential sources of bias). Grade A implies confidence that the true effect lies close to the estimate of the effect. Grade B evidence means moderate-quality evidence from randomised trials that suffers from serious flaws in conduct, inconsistency, indirectness, Everolimus imprecise estimates, reporting bias, or some combination of these limitations, or from other study designs with specific strengths such as observational studies with consistent effects and exclusion of the majority of the potential sources of bias. Grade C evidence is low-quality evidence from controlled trials with several serious limitations, or observational studies with limited evidence on effects and exclusion of most potential sources of bias. Grade D evidence is based only on case studies, expert judgement or observational studies with inconsistent effects and a potential for substantial bias, such that there can be little confidence

in the effect estimate. In addition to graded recommendations, the BHIVA Writing Group has also included good practice points Tyrosine-protein kinase BLK (GPP), which are recommendations based on the clinical judgement and experience of the working group. GPPs emphasise an area of important clinical practice for which there is not, nor is there likely to be, any significant research evidence. They address an aspect of treatment and care that is regarded as such sound clinical practice that health care professionals are unlikely to question it and where the alternative recommendation is deemed unacceptable. It must be emphasised that GPPs are not an alternative to evidence-based recommendations.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>